W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ontolex@w3.org > November 2013

Re: documents

From: Philipp Cimiano <cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de>
Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2013 20:42:37 +0100
Message-ID: <5277F8AD.6040503@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de>
To: "John P. McCrae" <jmccrae@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de>
CC: "public-ontolex@w3.org" <public-ontolex@w3.org>
Dear all,

Am 04.11.13 18:47, schrieb John P. McCrae:
> Hi Philipp,
>
> 1. I am not sure what you are trying to say about lexical variants, it 
> seems very similar to Elena and Jorge's existing proposal, if I am not 
> mistaken.

I was not trying to add anything really new to the discussion, but I 
promised to work things out in a few examples. The novel thing is that I 
treat lexicalVariants as Invididuals rather than as properties as 
discussed. I was trying to show the implications of this with an example.
We can discuss it in more detail during our telco this week.

>
> 2. The SKOS-XL mapping seems straightforward and in line with our 
> discussion. The issue I have is that nothing should map to SKOS's 
> "hidden" label category, which is used for "character string to be 
> accessible to applications performing text-based indexing and search 
> operations, but would *not* like that label to be visible otherwise." 
> Firstly, feminine forms of nouns would be alternative not hidden in 
> SKOS. Secondly, I do not think we need such a broad category in the 
> Ontolex model, that is we do not need to model frequent misspellings 
> except for  deliberate misspellings, and other reasons for hiding 
> labels in SKOS can be better described according to their pragmatic 
> restrictions (e.g., antiquated, vulgar terminology etc.)

Yes, probably you are right and we should not use the hiddenLabel for 
anything.
>
> Regards,
> John
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 7:04 PM, Philipp Cimiano 
> <cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de 
> <mailto:cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de>> wrote:
>
>     Dear all,
>
>      to provide more food for thought, I attach two documents:
>
>     1) lexicalVariantsWithReification: describing the reified variant
>     for expressing lexical variants. The drawback is that we need many
>     more properties to specify the role of each LexicalEntry.
>
>     2) ontolex_skos: elaborating one example taken from the IFLA
>     example on the Wiki showing how we could convert ontolex-lemon to
>     SKOS models given that we add some pragmatic information to it.
>
>     Have fun looking at the examples.
>
>     Comments welcome!
>
>     Philipp.
>
>     -- 
>
>     Prof. Dr. Philipp Cimiano
>
>     Phone: +49 521 106 12249 <tel:%2B49%20521%20106%2012249>
>     Fax: +49 521 106 12412 <tel:%2B49%20521%20106%2012412>
>     Mail: cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de
>     <mailto:cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de>
>
>     Forschungsbau Intelligente Systeme (FBIIS)
>     Raum 2.307
>     Universit├Ąt Bielefeld
>     Inspiration 1
>     33619 Bielefeld
>
>


-- 

Prof. Dr. Philipp Cimiano

Phone: +49 521 106 12249
Fax: +49 521 106 12412
Mail: cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de

Forschungsbau Intelligente Systeme (FBIIS)
Raum 2.307
Universit├Ąt Bielefeld
Inspiration 1
33619 Bielefeld
Received on Monday, 4 November 2013 19:43:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:36:36 UTC